SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, J. - (1.) This writ petition is under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, whereby and whereunder the order dated 10.05.2016 passed in Execution Case No.92 of 2002 by Sub Judge-I, Hazaribag has been assailed by which the petition filed on 29.04.2016 by Judgment Debtor Nos.2, 5 and 6, the petitioners herein under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure has been rejected.
(2.) The brief facts of the case as per the pleading made by the writ petitioners that the petitioners-Ranchi Industrial Area Development Authority (RIADA) against whom the suit was preferred by one Hari Lal being Title Suit No.49 of 2000 in the Court of Sub Judge, Hazaribag, inter alia, for the following reliefs: "(A) The Learned Court be pleased to appoint an Arbitrator regarding the subject matter in dispute and refer the matter in dispute for Arbitration after calling upon the defendants to file the original Agreement and claim book along with measurement Book for correct and just decision of the suit. (B) Interim relief may be granted in respect of admitted dues under the provision of the Act and law for Rs.6,23,841 and the defendants be restrained from making any payment to any other person/Contractors from the fund available till the payment of the claim amount to the plaintiff, with upto date interest including all other payable amounts etc. (C) Cost of the suit and interest alongwith compensation against losses be awarded to the plaintiff against the defendant, in the light of the statements of accounts in detail in Schedule 'A' attached herewith. (D) Any other relief which this learned court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case be awarded to the plaintiff."?
(3.) The plaintiff has filed the aforesaid suit on the basis of the background that he was allotted the work of construction of road, culvert and drains in the area of Hazaribagh Industrial Area Development Authority under RIADA, Ranchi for which an agreement was executed between the plaintiff and the defendant no.3, Executive Engineer, RIADA, Ranchi vide Agreement No.166F2 of 1984-85 and completed the work finally on 30.11.1988 but the claim of the plaintiff amounting to Rs.6,23,841/- has not been paid. The trial court vide dated 29.09.2000 appointed one Shri R.D. Narayan, Retd. Superintending Engineer, PWD as arbitrator. The aforesaid order was challenged before this Court under its revisional jurisdiction as per the provision of Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure being Civil Revision No.45 of 2001, this Court has appointed one Munir Ahmad, Retd. Superintending Engineer, PWD Ranchi as arbitrator in place of Sri R.D. Narayan, Retd. Superintending Engineer, PWD Ranchi. The said Munir Ahmad, Retd. Executive Engineer showed his inability to act as an arbitrator and thereafter the Sub Judge-I, Hazaribagh vide order dated 23.03.2002 has appointed one Sri Jai Nath Ram, Retd. Superintending Engineer, PWD Ranchi as an arbitrator, who vide award dated 29.08.2002 has passed order in favour of the contractor by way of ex parte award therein for payment of Rs.3,10,442.36 along with simple interest @ 12% per annum with effect from 25.05.1987 till date of final payment by defendants/respondents. The said award has been made as the rule of the Court vide order dated 19.12.2008. The original plaintiff has filed execution case being Execution Case No.92 of 2002 in the court of Sub Judge-I, Hazaribagh on 24.12.2002, however, during pendency of the execution case the plaintiff namely Hari Lal died on 25.05.2011 and therefore, he was substituted through his legal heir vide order dated 01.12.2014. The executing court has proceeded after calling upon the petitioner/defendants and ultimately the executing court has passed an order with warrant of attachment with a direction upon the office to submit report of warrant of attachment and it is only thereafter the defendants appeared and filed show cause. The petitioner thereafter has filed a petition under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure raising the objection by filing a petition on 29.04.2016 but the same has been rejected vide order dated 10.05.2016 against which the present writ petition has been filed. ;